4.0 Article

Sexual dysfunction in men after treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms: evidence from randomised controlled trial

期刊

BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 324, 期 7345, 页码 1059-1061

出版社

BRITISH MED JOURNAL PUBL GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.324.7345.1059

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To examine the impact on sexual function of treatments for lower urinary tract symptoms in men. Design Multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial of standard surgery (transurethral resection of the prostate), non-contact laser therapy, and conservative management (no active intervention). Setting Three clinical centres in the United Kingdom. Participants 340 men aged between 48 and 90 years with lower urinary tract symptoms related to benign prostatic enlargement. Main outcome measures ICSsex questionnaire items concerned with erectile stiffness, ejaculatory volume, pain or discomfort on ejaculation, whether sex life was spoilt by urinary symptoms. Results Erectile and ejaculatory dysfunction were common (70%) and problematic at baseline and showed the expected trends with ageing. After treatment, reduced ejaculation was reported in all groups but was not significantly worse after standard surgery than after laser therapy. Erectile function was significantly improved after standard surgery; no significant difference was found between standard surgery and laser therapy (odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 1.38). Standard surgery was significantly better at relieving pain or discomfort on ejaculation than either conservative management (0.06, 0.007 to 0.49) or laser therapy (0.09, 0.01 to 0.73). Conclusions Compared with laser therapy standard surgery for lower urinary tract symptoms has a beneficial effect oil aspects of sexual function-particularly in improving erectile function and reducing reported pain or discomfort oil ejaculation. Older men who need treatment and want to retain or improve sexual function may thus want to consider standard surgery rather than non-contact laser therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据